|
Time, again, has been described as some sort of a sequence
upon Movement, but we learn nothing from this, nothing is said,
until we know what it is that produces this sequential thing:
probably the cause and not the result would turn out to be Time.
And, admitting such a thing, there would still remain the
question whether it came into being before the movement, with it,
or after it; and, whether we say before or with or after, we are
speaking of order in Time: and thus our definition is "Time is a
sequence upon movement in Time!"
Enough: Our main purpose is to show what Time is, not to refute
false definition. To traverse point by point the many opinions of
our many predecessors would mean a history rather than an
identification; we have treated the various theories as fully as
is possible in a cursory review: and, notice, that which makes
Time the Measure of the All-Movement is refuted by our entire
discussion and, especially, by the observations upon the
Measurement of Movement in general, for all the argument- except,
of course, that from irregularity- applies to the All as much as
to particular Movement.
We are, thus, at the stage where we are to state what Time really
is.
|
|